They are going after AI full blast. It's funny to see the low-light packages they choose to accompany him now. They might as well show him going around and kicking the homeless.

This is from the Free Press but by a Philly writer. Geez.

Iverson’s experiences in Denver and Detroit also debunk the notion that the only reason he didn’t win a championship in Philadelphia is because the Sixers never surrounded him with enough talent.

Maybe the Sixers’ lack of a title had as much to do with Iverson as it did with guys such as Jerry Stackhouse, Toni Kukoc, Matt Harpring, Keith Van Horn, Glenn Robinson and Chris Webber, who all seemingly forgot how to play basketball when teamed with Iverson.

Iverson has been traded twice in the past three seasons, and, in both cases, the teams getting rid of him got the better of the deal.

Click to expand...

When Iverson returns to health, he likely will come off the bench, and might be further down it than anyone expects. This summer, when Iverson becomes an unrestricted free agent, he is unlikely to command more than the veteran’s exception for a contract. Allen Iverson isn’t yet a journeyman player, but he’s moving in that direction.

he actually made a good point about billiups... both times we played them we did a just horrible job on him in the first half and a much better in the 2nd half. Didn't Prince take him out in the denver game and last night the guards did a good job of keeping him from the ball in the 2nd half.

The announcers made a good point that for alot of the 4th quarter denver was playing 4 on 4 offense because we denied him the ball back once he passed off.

Damn straight! I think this also. I am waiting for you to take it seriously. I would like to see a working extension of your ego which all feel that they must contribute in order to bring balance. You must show enough talent to know enough in order to frame an outbalance that challenges.

Remember: explaining is controlling. Extolling is being a comedian.

Click to expand...

I could if I had more time (or paying sponsors)...I just don't have the time to commit to the necessary research in order to really make a go at it.

Yet Iverson has also served to affirm the Pistons' belief in their system. They remain the only franchise in recent years to win a title without an elite star, emerging in 2003-04 with a nuanced blend of talent lacking the traditional superstar scorer found on all other championship teams of the last three decades. In that sense, Iverson amounted to an experiment: Could Dumars upgrade the Pistons' operating system by plugging in an elite scorer? The Answer has provided that answer: No.

Click to expand...

"The way Joe's been running this team, he's always going to run it the same way,'' Hamilton said. "He's not going to switch it up because that's not him. This is the style he played in, and this is the style that won us championships.''

Click to expand...

This quote by Rip makes it sound like from day 1, none of the players believed Iverson would work here and they never even tried to make it work. If that's really the case, AI isn't going to get on the good side of this team even if he gave foot massages to the whole team after every game.

"We're not going to change our model in order to lay the success or failure on one superstar,'' Dumars said. "We're going to continue the model that we've had here and that has worked for a long time. We will always try to build one of the deepest teams in the NBA, which is what we've done over the years. "I'm not averse to a star. But it has got to be a star who can flourish in this type of environment, this type of culture that we've become accustomed to here.''

Click to expand...

If that's the case Joe, then how can you say that you were hoping for a success this year with a straight face?

I still like Dumars no-superstar model. More diversification and therefore less likely to be derailed by injury, slump, etc. I believe that he proved it's a valid model. Got a championship and could have had 1 or 2 more with a little luck or one more contributor off the bench (ala if Darko would have panned out to be the equiv of a late 1st rounder).

I think he should use this new found cap space to go after multiple (3 or 4) 2nd tier stars that play defense and fit our model instead of the 1 or 2 top guys that everyone's going after.

Inevitably, when his no-superstars achieve success, they will want recognition. They will want minutes, bigger paydays, and all-star appearances.

Exceptional people rarely settle for mediocre results, and mediocre people aspire to exceptional results.

It's great in a fairy tale sense, but it runs in denial to reality. Rip wanted to be a starter again because he believes he is a star. McDyess is the Joe Dumars exception to the rule, good luck finding 5 or 6 of him. First round picks who are exceptional players, with nearly zero ego.

As time goes on, I think the only reason that team won a title and competed in back to back years, was the superstar coach, and the superstar leader (Ben Wallace).

We need superstars with the right attitude. We need Tim Duncans, Manu Ginobilis, Bill Laimbeers and Isiah Thomases.

There's virtually no competition in that space, which is why I like it. The Spurs are the only team looking for the type of players that we should be looking for.

There are 6 teams or so that have no real strategy.

The other 22 are all fighting over the same assets.

They are all chasing stocks with high P/E's. We should be the strategic value investor that scoops up underappreciated assets.

In our niche, we can overpay on the market price by 25% and still be getting a good deal. Rip Hamilton is a player that I would consider a 2nd tier star. Add guys like Battier and Afflalo in with Rip Hamiltons and Rasheed Wallace's and you have the potential for a sum greater than the parts. So, not only do you get a discount on your assets when you acquire them, but your returns get boosted by the synergy.

At the upper end of the spectrum, we can pay the market price and get a terrible deal. I don't want Rashard Lewis taking up 25% of our team salary for example... no matter how well he plays. Jason Kidd making $21M? Allen Iverson making $22M? For every team that has success with the superstar model, there are 5 others where it is an utter failure.

The NBA more than any other sport, features the teams with the most talent, playing at the end of the year. 8th seeds rarely make it to the conference Finals.

In the NFL, a wildcard, or in the NHL, an 8th seed, can play for the championship.

So talent is not the issue. We obviously need as much talent as possible, even if it is first tier.

But we need first tier talent at the best possible price, and equipped with Pistons DNA.

The problem with this organization, and it starts with Bill D deciding to fire Larry Brown before he won the title, is that it's very insular, it has blinders on much of the time. That focus is great when they are right, but devastating when they are wrong.

The Spurs are working in a smaller market, with less money and a more hands on ownership group, but they are less afraid of making mistakes, and take chances all of the time.

Some cultures become so rigid they can't adapt. That is what has happened to our Pistons. Trading Chauncey was just the first step to redefining the squad. Sheed and Dice will be gone next. Rip and Tay will be thrust into the spotlight, and all success and failure, whether they are ready for it or not, is going to be on their shoulders.

That is the price of resisting change. Ultimately, you end up being accountable for the results.

Maybe Darko has Pistons DNA now but he didn't when he was drafted. Ben came with Pistons DNA, Rip and Chauncey adopted it, and Sheed, I dunno I don't think he ever really had Pistons DNA.

I thought Maxie had Pistons DNA, but so did Don Reid. Talent and DNA. I thought AI had it too, but he's the wrong guy, at the wrong time it seems.

Upon joining the Sixers as a heralded rookie in 1996, Allen Iverson immediately established himself as a volume scorer. He was fearless, incredibly creative and elusive, and would eventually become the NBA's leading point-maker four times.

But there were also gaping holes in both his game and his attitude. He needed to dominate the ball to be effective. He refused to believe that a point guard could initiate an offensive sequence with a pass instead of insistent dribblings. He hoisted up too many quick shots and forced shots. His defense was all about gambling for steals. He disdained practice. Both his coaches and his teammates complained that it was impossible to run any kind of organized offense with AI on the court.

I snipped the article, but it is very good and well worth reading. We just can't reprint without permission.

My take is, the reason why Iverson didn't go to the bench is that the Pistons wanted to sell tickets, and I believe Joe thought he would make the team better, that the talent around him would be the difference.

It's strictly revisionist history at this point (and I won't let it go) that Stuckey starting was the original plan. After that Laker victory, no one would have conceived of Rip or AI going to the bench.